Crap or not, there are a zillion sites using the plugin, and it's the best option available for 2d based webgames or interactive presentations. The only reason uncle Steve doesn't want Flash, is that he knows that a lot of videos and games will be available, bypassing his AppStore.

And who makes the Flash plugin?
And do you think Adobe would stand by and let SJ and Apple reverse engineer it so it would actually WORK on the iProducts?
And do you know (positively!) that Adobe isn't working on a version for Apple's devices?
Possibly as a stand-alone app just in time for the actual retail release?

Hey... if Adobe can pull off making a Flash plugin that dosn't suck the battery dry in an hour... I do believe Apple just might let it on the iPhone and iPad. 'Til then.... Fo-GET-a-boud-it!... and I agree with that decision.

Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member

another grand slam by apple
the desk top line dies and the ipad takes over
ipad ?? weird name ??? i wonder what we will really call it ??

peace
9

Grand slam is yet to be seen. No one's been able to get their hands on it for a full review until it goes on sale (April?). There's just as much of a chance it'll end up being a "meh" device as it will be a "grand slam".

It's almost like when the first iPhone was released. Missing a lot of features, but people still bought it. Because there was nothing like it when the iPhone was released in 2007. However, this time around, we already have great devices (iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch) in many people's hands. We'll see if the millions of iPhone owners will be willing to part with $800+ and another $30/month for something they pretty much already have.

And who makes the Flash plugin?
And do you think Adobe would stand by and let SJ and Apple reverse engineer it so it would actually WORK on the iProducts?
And do you know (positively!) that Adobe isn't working on a version for Apple's devices?
Possibly as a stand-alone app just in time for the actual retail release?

Hey... if Adobe can pull off making a Flash plugin that dosn't suck the battery dry in an hour... I do believe Apple just might let it on the iPhone and iPad. 'Til then.... Fo-GET-a-boud-it!... and I agree with that decision.

Apple games are all C/ObjC/C++/ObjC++ with OpenGL. What part of "Flash" do these games need?

My first reaction was 'ZOMG look at the bezel'... but only took 1 second to realize the importance of it.
Won't buy rev 1. Never buy rev 1 anything is my motto.

Missing a few things - most important being a usb port. I'd like to be able to connect my digital camera to it.
Was also hoping for iChat features.

By the time Rev 2 comes out... I'm sure there will be a growing ecosystem around it with apps and 3rd party items (oh someone please design a hand strap so you don't have to hold it).

With 144,000 current apps to draw from the ecosystem already exists. The 3rd party devs will want to price for pre-existing iPhone/iPod Touch owners of their apps who buy the iPad an upgrade path to their new Universal app for all 3 devices.

If you want a full-function computer, they make those. They're called laptops. They work rather well and people like them. There was no need for a re-imagining of that mature, well-thought out form factor.

This device will be very good for what it is designed to do. Kudos to Apple for not making the mistake of trying to get the device to awkwardly perform tasks for which it's not suited.

That's the sort of foolish path the competition has travelled on and look where it got them.

Keep in mind that price is a big factor in all of this. I'm sure Apple could have imbued this device with some very revolutionary technology but then the price would have gone north of $1,000 and absolutely no one would buy the thing. What would be the point?

I think you've missed my point entirely. I have a computer. I don't need a laptop because that's a fully functional computer that you can carry around. What I want is a mobile that I can sync with my main computer and use to create and peruse documents of various types. Basically a second computer much like a netbook.

The iPhone allows for that, except for the "creation" part, and excepting the small size. What I was expecting here (and I don't think by any means I am alone in this), was a device like the iPHone, but bigger, and with content creation abilities. The iPad attempt to be that, but it fails technologically IMO. Needless to say later versions will do what I want, I think they could have done it with this version however instead of focussing on the media consumption angle. Selling devices specifically to passively consume media obviously is "the thing" lately, and obviously will make them a ton of money. I was merely hoping for a bit more, or in fact, *anything* that used technology to solve some of these problems.

What we have is a big iPod, with *no* new technology, that solves none of the problems associated with tablet computing and on top of that, eschews the use of some previously discovered solutions, like a stylus.

Why leave out a stylus, if what you have without it is not as good? I was assuming they would leave out the stylus, but have some cool method that replaced it. Instead they just left it out.

Why leave out thumb typing (which works so well on the iPhone), when they have nothing to replace it with?

The main physical design problems with tablets always have been input related. The biggest one of all has always been, .... how do you type on it without putting it down? The idea being that if you have to put it down on a surface to type on it, you might as well be carrying a laptop.

The most often proffered solution to this problem has been pen input, and either holding the big tablet in the crook or your arm, or making the tablet smaller. Apple has made it smaller and lighter, but they've taken away the stylus and replaced it with basically nothing at all.

Apple's solution is that you simply don't type on it without putting it down or you type on it like all tablets in the past by poking at a virtual keyboard with one finger at a time. This is seriously lame, and worthy of criticism.

There are some things I like about this, but the lack of multi-tasking is just a total deal breaker for me.

I sit on the sofa browsing the web, and at the same time, using an IM client, and at the same time checking my email etc. Nothing complex, but it requires multi-tasking and the iPad can't do it. It's just bizarre, what a staggering omission.

Add to that the lack of flash, the lack of a camera (have Apple never heard of Skype?!), and the odd screen aspect ratio (didn't we ditch 4:3 YEARS ago? All video content is at least 16:9 now) and it just doesn't add up.

All good points. I think so many people were expecting a $999 device laden with all conceivable bells and whistles that they overlook the basic fact that Apple might have hit a sweet spot for price and functionality.

I agree, a really sweet starting price. This is only v.1 too, down the road I can see later models getting more bells and whistles such as camera behind the screen etc..

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

And just a minor correction...women do not call their tampons pads...tampons are inserted into the *ahem*...pads are applied as a sponge/liner outside of the *ahem* and called pads for short instead of "sanitary napkins". (My ex-wife used to send me to the store for them..LOL)

We of advanced age (over 20), thank you for your discreet lesson on female hygiene for all of the "snicker-giggle" juvenile crowd here today.

Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member

Carmissimo, most newer netbooks today have full 720p LED, but the IPS in the iPad will obviously have far better color and viewing angles. It's a trade-off of resolution versus quality, but the iPad's res. is about right for a multi-touch 10" LCD.

Also, the iPad's CPU is not higher quality than the newer Atom chips and certainly not the AMD Neo with integrated ATi graphics. The latter will actually do basic 1080p and modern gaming (at lower res.).

Processing power is a minor issue considering that I don't think either this device or a netbook should be expected to handle the sort of demanding tasks that should be done on a desktop or decent laptop. And it should be noted that if the display on the iPad is just shy of 720P, trying to run a 1080P file on the thing is kind of pointless.

Mainly, it's about the quality of the experience and I suspect the iPad will be a lot more enjoyable to use than your typical netbook. It isn't a laptop wannabe. It is a device that doesn't pretend to be suited to full-fledged computer use. Knowing Apple, it will do what it does very well and will not be set up to disappoint by way of permitting uses to which it's not suited. To those who require a device that performs tasks the iPad will not perform, I suggest looking elsewhere.

Apple games are all C/ObjC/C++/ObjC++ with OpenGL. What part of "Flash" do these games need?

Plenty of websites out there with fun Flash-based games to kill a little or a lot of time. You wouldn't need to buy a game from the App Store. Just point the browser to one of these many free sites and play away.

There are some things I like about this, but the lack of multi-tasking is just a total deal breaker for me.

I sit on the sofa browsing the web, and at the same time, using an IM client, and at the same time checking my email etc. Nothing complex, but it requires multi-tasking and the iPad can't do it. It's just bizarre, what a staggering omission.

Add to that the lack of flash, the lack of a camera (have Apple never heard of Skype?!), and the odd screen aspect ratio (didn't we ditch 4:3 YEARS ago? All video content is at least 16:9 now) and it just doesn't add up.

I really can't see this taking off.

The screen size is for reading and you can fit a wide screen movie in easily with letter boxing. It is a lot nicer that way rather than trying to squeeze a newspaper into the 16:9 which sucks either way you turn it. Why force a whole world of apps into the size that just happens to be for one use i.e. watching a movie?

The apps I suspect will be exactly where you left off if you change apps and come back so if it is fast it is almost as good as multitasking. I assume it has copy and paste too.

Good that there is no Flash.

A camera behind the screen would be nice, perhaps on a later model. A camera on the back would make this one very unwieldy camera, no thanks to that.

You want to go on record saying this won't take off? Wow,

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Plenty of websites out there with fun Flash-based games to kill a little or a lot of time. You wouldn't need to buy a game from the App Store. Just point the browser to one of these many free sites and play away.

Well you gotta give props to the loyal ones for getting excited over this. I think this thing could have been twice as thick & have half the features, and many loyal fans of Apple would still get excited.

A few people raise good points though, like with aspect ratio, smart card readers, that sort of thing.

This is like a cross between a computer, a real tablet, and an ipod touch. It seems perfect for someone who just wants to browse the web for a few minutes, look at or share some photos in more vivid detail than the ipod touch would, and even play a few casual games.

I guess I was expecting a computer in the traditional sense. Also, the rumors really built this thing up so it was a bit of a let-down. The if the facial recognition rumor had been true, this thing would be looked at differently I think, but what's the point if there's no reason to have profiles?

Composing long emails, cutting and pasting - use the optional keyboard... duh!

That would certainly help a little however there are a lot of touch only features in that demo of iWork, so no, it will not be like using a mouse to select text or drop a cursor into a sentence which for me is a major part of composing a long document or memo. So the 'duh!' part of your post was just meaningless.

iPad? Who were the geniuses that came up with that name? Did they not know that millions of women refer to their tampons as pads? Does the iPad have wings? Can you swim in it? WTF!?

So you a pad of paper causes you to giggle every time it is mentioned? Or when someone says come over to my pad you go into shock? Or a cat pads across the table ... how about taking the shuttle out to the launch pad, NASA causes you embarrassment? A keypad? A Game Pad? How about a helipad? You see feminine hygiene in all these? You need to get help I think

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Apple games are all C/ObjC/C++/ObjC++ with OpenGL. What part of "Flash" do these games need?

Maybe not need, but the new Flash (I guess version 11) will allow Flash to export to iPhone app. So then all of the Flash haters will quieting go out and purchase the dreaded Adobe product because Obj C was too difficult to learn - but Flash has made it easy to write IpHone apps with the next version due out soon.

I think you've missed my point entirely. I have a computer. I don't need a laptop because that's a fully functional computer that you can carry around. What I want is a mobile that I can sync with my main computer and use to create and peruse documents of various types. Basically a second computer much like a netbook.

The iPhone allows for that, except for the "creation" part, and excepting the small size. What I was expecting here (and I don't think by any means I am alone in this), was a device like the iPHone, but bigger, and with content creation abilities. The iPad attempt to be that, but it fails technologically IMO. Needless to say later versions will do what I want, I think they could have done it with this version however instead of focussing on the media consumption angle. Selling devices specifically to passively consume media obviously is "the thing" lately, and obviously will make them a ton of money. I was merely hoping for a bit more, or in fact, *anything* that used technology to solve some of these problems.

What we have is a big iPod, with *no* new technology, that solves none of the problems associated with tablet computing and on top of that, eschews the use of some previously discovered solutions, like a stylus.

Why leave out a stylus, if what you have without it is not as good? I was assuming they would leave out the stylus, but have some cool method that replaced it. Instead they just left it out.

Why leave out thumb typing (which works so well on the iPhone), when they have nothing to replace it with?

The main physical design problems with tablets always have been input related. The biggest one of all has always been, .... how do you type on it without putting it down? The idea being that if you have to put it down on a surface to type on it, you might as well be carrying a laptop.

The most often proffered solution to this problem has been pen input, and either holding the big tablet in the crook or your arm, or making the tablet smaller. Apple has made it smaller and lighter, but they've taken away the stylus and replaced it with basically nothing at all.

Apple's solution is that you simply don't type on it without putting it down or you type on it like all tablets in the past by poking at a virtual keyboard with one finger at a time. This is seriously lame, and worthy of criticism.

Rather than considering what the iPad doesn't do, I think it has to be assessed based on what it does do. For anyone considering purchasing this or any product, it comes down to whether or not a particular product performs functions that warrant buying it.

While you downplay what this machine can do, I believe that quite a few people will find it useful. Don't forget that you have a lot of people who have been using the iPhone and Touch to perform many of the functions that the iPad will. I think with a starting price of about $500, many of those people will find it appealing to have the opportunity to perform those functions on a device with a much larger screen. Apple will lose the opportunity to sell this unit to individuals who wanted the unit to do more but the potential customer base for this device is such that it's going to be successful just the same.

Keep in mind, too, that Apple operates on the notion that if you can't do something right, don't do it all. It's not as if any other company has successfully tamed the tablet's shortcomings. Tablets have been notoriously unpopular, pricey devices. The iPad, on the other hand, at least at first glance, would appear to be a reasonably priced device with a good shot at being popular.

Don't say "good that there is no flash" as if it's a good thing that any device isn't more robust. If it's not capable of doing flash because of hardware limitations, fine, but why would anyone WANT a gadget to lack features?

Maybe not need, but the new Flash (I guess version 11) will allow Flash to export to iPhone app. So then all of the Flash haters will quieting go out and purchase the dreaded Adobe product because Obj C was too difficult to learn - but Flash has made it easy to write IpHone apps with the next version due out soon.

Don't say "good that there is no flash" as if it's a good thing that any device isn't more robust. If it's not capable of doing flash because of hardware limitations, fine, but why would anyone WANT a gadget to lack features?

I am allowed to my opinion as you are to yours. It was only one small point in a list you missed out, do you disagree with the rest of the comments too or just that one? I don't see the ability to run Flash as a required feature on this device. I use Click to Flash on all of my Macs and am very happy to block it (BTW when you do you see large clear boxes over buttons on many web sites that are traps to load ads and god knows what). When I want to run it I can, simple as that. The iPad I see no need.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Youll Rule the World
Alan Kay, regarding his reaction to the iPhone in January 2007:

When the Mac first came out, Newsweek asked me what I [thought] of it. I said: Well, its the first personal computer worth criticizing. So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and youll rule the world.

I think this sums it up best. My wife and I both spend a little time each day reading the news headlines or watching a few YouTube videos. For that, we usually end up with both our laptops sitting on our kitchen table, which is overkill.

But now I'm picturing TV ads with people in sweaters and khaki pants and easy listening music. Casual computing, brought to you by Apple.

But judging by the comments here, the product should have been called iBezel!

so how many laptops/tablets do you type on standing up? You have a third appendage capable of holding up a such a device while you freely type with your other two hands?

There is plenty you can do with it while holding it with one hand...so i guess you are disappointed that it does not magnetically levitate in the perfect position in front of you at all times...

Don't be an idiot. Laptops have to be lied down to be useful. The idea of a tablet is that you can use it like a clipboard (standing up), and because it lacks a keyboard, it (lamely) usually needs to be lied down to type on it. This is one of the central physical limitations of the tablet, one of the main reasons people don't use a tablet, and one that Apple was rumoured to have solved.

I am disappointed that they haven't solved it is all.

Two handed-thumb typing is an obvious solution that works well on the iPhone, but that has been explicitly buggered with this design. So not only does this tablet not solve any significant problems of previous tablets, it takes away one possible solution on top of that.

Rather than considering what the iPad doesn't do, I think it has to be assessed based on what it does do. For anyone considering purchasing this or any product, it comes down to whether or not a particular product performs functions that warrant buying it.

While you downplay what this machine can do, I believe that quite a few people will find it useful. Don't forget that you have a lot of people who have been using the iPhone and Touch to perform many of the functions that the iPad will. I think with a starting price of about $500, many of those people will find it appealing to have the opportunity to perform those functions on a device with a much larger screen. Apple will lose the opportunity to sell this unit to individuals who wanted the unit to do more but the potential customer base for this device is such that it's going to be successful just the same.

Keep in mind, too, that Apple operates on the notion that if you can't do something right, don't do it all. It's not as if any other company has successfully tamed the tablet's shortcomings. Tablets have been notoriously unpopular, pricey devices. The iPad, on the other hand, at least at first glance, would appear to be a reasonably priced device with a good shot at being popular.

I don't disagree that it will be popular and that it will be a success for Apple. I am likely buying at least one myself.

That doesn't stop me from seeing that this is really nothing new technology wise, and is primarily a device for passive consumption of media, rather than a mobile computer that one can use to produce media.

It is a worthy netbook replacement only in the sense that most people don't use a netbook for anything but passive activities like browsing the web or watching movies.

It is not a worthy netbook replacement if you consider a netbook something you actually do work on.

So then all of the Flash haters will quieting go out and purchase the dreaded Adobe product because Obj C was too difficult to learn - but Flash has made it easy to write IpHone apps with the next version due out soon.

I don't think the price is particularly good either. Since this device is intended principally for the consumption of visual media, nothing less than the 64gb version is likely going to be adequate.

That's $699 to start with.

Case - got to have the case - what's that - another $30?

$729

Got to have the SD card adapter and the USB one - that's $20 each.

$769

Keyboard and stand - got some reports to catch up on - got to have the keyboard - That's $60.

$829

$1 - the cost of the bullet to shoot myself with when I realise I could have had a Macbook for only $170 more.

Why is nothing less than 64gB going to be adequate - your statement and following assumption begins with a nonsensical conclusion. Why do you need the SD adapter and the USB one? If you already have a bluetooth keyboard why do you need to buy another one. $499 will do just what I need this device to do. I'm not replacing a laptop, I'm seeing this device for what it is and browsing the web (no need for storage) reading a book (can't be that big a file) or listening to some music (again, 64gig covers most peoples audio listening for a few days.) All at home on my wireless N network. Easy. $499. No more.

"Since this device is intended principally for the consumption of visual media" Is it? I thought it was principally for reading books, browsing the web and checking yr email?